Whats your favorite argument for the existence of God?

[James_S_Saint]

“Day” and “how long” are used to denote a space of time. There is no time with God because He transcends space and time, He created them. He created it, that’s that. There is only a before and after in the universe. God is eternally in the present.

If this is the case, then God did not suddenly choose to create time.

When did he create it? How long ago? What was happening before that?

 

[zach_dunn]

I can’t think of anything. I think it is a fallacy to believe that such can happen. But then, I know how the universe got here, you haven’t shown that reasoning.

Do you mean the reasoning that something can’t bring itself into existence? I haven’t shown that?

 

[1holycatholic]

“Day” and “how long” are used to denote a space of time. There is no time with God because He transcends space and time, He created them. He created it, that’s that. There is only a before and after in the universe. God is eternally in the present.

It’s more accurate to say that God exists atemporally. God’s knowledge is atemporal where all events are eternally in the present (see Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae, Book V).

 

[James_S_Saint]

Do you mean the reasoning that something can’t bring itself into existence? I haven’t shown that?

No. That wasn’t what I meant.

But let me cut to the chase here a bit, if that’s okay;

God, The Father (specifically, not the Son or Spirit), is the Principle that causes the universe to exist at all. But that Principle (God) has existed forever, timelessly, eternally.

But what that ends up meaning is that the Principle we call God the Father, created the universe the very instant that there was a God - infinitely long ago.

 

[zach_dunn]

If this is the case, then God did not suddenly choose to create time.

When did he create it?

In space and time? I’m not sure, I haven’t looked into it much. I’m leaning towards an “Intelligent Design” view, so maybe a couple billion years?

From God’s perspective in eternity? Right now, God is always in the present. He sees everything in the present. He is creating the universe, Jesus is on the cross, and I’m typing all in the present for Him.

How long ago? What was happening before that?

How long ago is the same as the above. As for the “what happened before that?” question, I’m not exactly sure. It’s hard to say there was a “before” because before is an element of space and time. You’d have to ask someone a little more knowledgeable than me for an answer to that one.

 

[zach_dunn]

It’s more accurate to say that God exists atemporally. God’s knowledge is atemporal where all events are eternally in the present (see Boethius’ Consolatio Philosophiae, Book V).

Thanks for the clarification, like I said, I’m new to this.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Thanks for the clarification, like I said, I’m new to this.

Sorry for placing you in a middle of war zone by influencing you to express the cosmological arguement. However, Its good for practice. It is the most hated arguement on this forum aside the belief that God is good.

Peace.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Kalam;
Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
Premise 2: The universe began to exist.

Premise 2 is a false assertion.

Premise two is supported by science don’t you think? Also, just because an assertion is merely an assertion, it doesn’t mean that it is false. Google William lane Craig.

 

[zach_dunn]

No. That wasn’t what I meant.

But let me cut to the chase here a bit, if that’s okay;

God, The Father (specifically, not the Son or Spirit), is the Principle that causes the universe to exist at all. But that Principle (God) has existed forever, timelessly, eternally.

But what that ends up meaning is that the Principle we call God the Father, created the universe the very instant that there was a God - infinitely long ago.

You’re looking from time to eternity. If eternity came before time, it would be logical to look from eternity to time. From God’s perspective in eternity, the universe is created now and the universe is ending now. The point is that space and time will not exist forever which is clear if you look at it from God’s view.

 

[zach_dunn]

Sorry for placing you in a middle of war zone by influencing you to express the cosmological arguement. However, Its good for practice. It is the most hated arguement on this forum aside the belief that God is good.

Peace.

Oh, not a problem, I really need this too. As of now I’m in my very first Philosophy class and in a week or two we’re going to be discussing this topic. And I know there are a least two professing atheists in the class.

 

[James_S_Saint]

You’re looking from time to eternity. If eternity came before time, it would be logical to look from eternity to time. From God’s perspective in eternity, the universe is created now and the universe is ending now. The point is that space and time will not exist forever which is clear if you look at it from God’s view.

So now you see from God’s view??

There shall never be a “no time” state of reality. - God’s view (unless somehow we lose God).

 

[1holycatholic]

Thanks for the clarification, like I said, I’m new to this.

The Consolation of Philosophy is great read. I read it in a Natural Theology class. It’s pretty straightforward.

St. Aquinas’ Summa Theologica is easy to misread (as evidenced by many posts here). I’d strongly suggest Dr. Peter Kreeft’s Summa of the Summa as an introduction. The footnotes for the five ways are enormous.

 

[James_S_Saint]

You’re looking from time to eternity. If eternity came before time, …

…and what does that actually mean??

 

[zach_dunn]

…and what does that actually mean??

It means you looking at eternity as a succession of moments, when eternity is specifically a lack of moments.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Premise two is supported by science don’t you think? Also, just because an assertion is merely an assertion, it doesn’t mean that it is false. Google William lane Craig.

No, Science does NOT support that the universe “began to exist”. It merely asserts that our perceivable universe seems to be expanding, at the moment, from a central position (not a singularity).

Science makes no claims as to what was before the “Big Bang” theory. Logic dictates that the universe has always existed. It merely changes its position as it flows, perhaps through an infinite number of Bangs.

 

[zach_dunn]

The Consolation of Philosophy is great read. I read it in a Natural Theology class. It’s pretty straightforward.

St. Aquinas’ Summa Theologica is easy to misread (as evidenced by many posts here). I’d strongly suggest Dr. Peter Kreeft’s Summa of the Summa as an introduction. The footnotes for the five ways are enormous.

I wanted to get the Summa of the Summa, I started with The Handbook of Christian Apologetics. That’s where I first encountered the kalam argument. What do you think of The Handbook? Have you read it?

 

[1holycatholic]

…and what does that actually mean??

Time is asymmetric, it can’t regress infinitely because that would be an actual infinite, but it can potentially progress infinitely into the future.

Eternity is a state of timelessness.

 

[James_S_Saint]

It means you looking at eternity as a succession of moments, when eternity is specifically a lack of moments.

Then nothing I said changes.

God is eternal and where there is God, there is a universe - always.

 

[zach_dunn]

No, Science does NOT support that the universe “began to exist”. It merely asserts that our perceivable universe seems to be expanding, at the moment, from a central position (not a singularity).

Science makes no claims as to what was before the “Big Bang” theory. Logic dictates that the universe has always existed. It merely changes its position as it flows, perhaps through an infinite number of Bangs.

The idea of everlasting “Bangs” was refuted in post 187 with the kalam argument. It’s just not logical for the universe to extend infinitely back into time.

 

[James_S_Saint]

Time is asymmetric, it can’t regress infinitely because that would be an actual infinite, but it can potentially progress infinitely into the future.

Eternity is a state of timelessness.

Sigh…

If there is a potential infinite future, then there is a potential infinite past.

And time is not “asymmetric”. Again, you are merely presuming.